vmarks

linkman said:

A $900 unit and it doesn't have wireless CarPlay? Big miss.

Their previous unit, the ILX-107, does have wireless carplay. I reviewed it, here on AppleInsider.com. Not every unit gets all the features.

bigcountry said:

Looks like he used some lens attachments though... the iPhone’s lens is not that wide. 

Moment 2x telephoto and Moondogs Labs anamorphic lens.

rogifan_new said:

sflocal said:

Typical ignorance displayed in this thread.  I'm glad Apple saw the error of its ways.  Why do you feel it okay for a multi-billion-dollar company like Apple to compensate everyone else involved in the campaign - from the judges, print-labs, post-processors, billboard owners, etc but not the person that took the actual photograph?  Is their time and effort for taking that one perfect shot not worth anything?

The iPhone is probably the most popular "camera" in use today for social-media.  That gives people like you the impression that this competition is all about posting some random selfies, or quick-pics, and while I'm sure there will be many doing that, anyone serious in wanting to get into that top ten will put effort, and even money - in terms of gas, travel, lodging maybe?? - to turn what's in their mind a reality.  Most people nowadays think taking a photo is just a matter of pressing the shutter button.  Fine, but taking an actual "photograph" that speaks to you and makes it an emotional statement takes effort and an artistic touch.

The "average iPhone user wasn't whining" just means they don't care - literally.  They think it will just be like winning the lottery - a fluke.  Even then, they should be paid something.  You want to do things for free, go right ahead.  Doesn't mean it's right.

Did Apple say the people judging the photos were being paid?  Anyway now that people are being paid it changes the competition IMO. If Apple wanted to commission an ad campaign with professional photographers they could easily do so. I thought this campaign was all about amateurs and the idea that you didn’t have to put in a lot of effort (or know a lot about photograph) to get a great photo from the smartphone in your pocket. But maybe I was wrong and Apple is expecting people will put in a lot of time and effort to get a great shot and in that case then yeah pay them. But people will still complain that the license fee isn’t enough.

If you're profiting off the work of someone, that person deserves to be paid. Just because someone is an amateur doesn't change that their work has value. If it has value (and it does, if it's good enough that you're using it on billboards), then it should be paid for. It's still amateur photography. It still shows that you can get a great photo from an iPhone. The subtext you presumed, that it doesn't take a lot of effort, or require knowing a lot about photography was never a part of the contest, or a part of previous "shot on iPhone" campaigns. They like for you to presume that, but pro photogs participated, and that was fine, too.

The reason professionals are up in arms is, when you devalue the work of an amateur, you devalue the work of the professional. How many times are professionals asked to do something for exposure? All the time. How fast will their rates drop when you can just get an amateur to do it for free? Blindingly fast. Which means, less people able to make work professionally, which has bad results for the amount of people able to produce the things we enjoy in the world. You think I'm kidding, but there is an impact: if you don't pay people, people go into other fields. On a longer timeline, this is how you lose beauty, art, and eventually culture. There are no patrons: either people get paid, or it goes away.

Abode is a noun, meaning home or residence. That it is similar to Adobe, meaning sun-dried bricks made from mud is coincidental. Also, naming a company that makes photo software after mud bricks is messed up.

MplsP said:

This seems nice and the USB port is a plus, but most of the places I would want a controllable switch (i.e. to control a lamp, etc) are places I wouldn't use a USB port, so I'm not sure how useful that actually is. Either way, it would be nice if they had an installable device rather than something that sticks 1" out from the wall. 

They showed an in-wall version at CES. It wasn't ready to be put in our hands for review.